Shannon Heyck-Williams – The National Wildlife Federation Bloghttps://blog.nwf.org
The National Wildlife Federation's blogMon, 19 Nov 2018 15:22:31 +0000en-UShourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.8139259312State Climate Policies Gain Steam, Help Save the Planethttps://blog.nwf.org/2018/10/state-climate-policies-gain-steam-help-save-the-planet/
Tue, 16 Oct 2018 13:34:37 +0000http://blog.nwf.org/?p=137045Reflections on the Global Climate Action Summit and other signs of progress Those of us who have been following climate change at a national level know that there hasn’t been …

]]>Reflections on the Global Climate Action Summit and other signs of progress

Those of us who have been following climate change at a national level know that there hasn’t been much forward progress. While I firmly believe that we can and must adopt lasting, comprehensive, national-level climate solutions here in the nation’s capital (and give kudos to Republican Congressman Carlos Curbelo for introducing a federal carbon tax bill), major federal policy action is likely a long game.

Thankfully, states, cities, businesses, organizations, and advocates from around the world continue to ratchet up ambition to safeguard our climate, which will benefit people and wildlife alike. Such commitment was on display at the recent Global Climate Action Summit, and is also reflected in upcoming opportunities at the voting booth this November.

American Progress at the Global Climate Action Summit

Delegates from all over the world came to San Francisco in September to learn from and motivate each other, and to announce significant new actions to reduce climate pollution. Commitments came from multinational corporations, local and state policymakers, philanthropies, investors, non-governmental organizations, and others. Some of the most encouraging announcements from U.S. governors and mayors included:

The U.S. Climate Alliance – a bipartisan coalition of U.S. governors upholding U.S. Paris Climate Agreement goals – has taken on new commitments to reduce short-lived climate pollutants, modernize the grid, bring down solar power costs, improve appliance energy efficiency standards, deploy more clean transportation, and identify best practices for capturing and storing carbon in forests, farms, and other ecosystems.

Washington State, California, and three U.S. cities joined a global zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) alliance of states/regions, cities, and multinational businesses committing to using 100 percent public ZEV fleets by 2030, and nineteen U.S. cities formed the Electric Vehicle Purchasing Collaborative to drive down costs.

In addition to linking with the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, Virginia is joining the Transportation and Climate Initiative to cut carbon pollution from the transportation sector, developing an ocean acidification action plan, and putting together a framework to cut oil and gas sector and landfill-associated methane pollution – a climate super-pollutant.

Connecticut, Maryland, New York, and California are crafting rules to phase out the use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), a class of super-polluting greenhouse gases.

States and cities along the West Coast committed to reduce food loss and waste by 50 percent by 2030 through the Pacific Coast Collaborative.

Los Angeles committed to carbon neutrality by 2050.

New York City pledged to double investments in clean energy and climate solutions to $4 billion over the next three years.

November is a Pivotal Moment in the Fight against Climate Change

The progress many states and cities are showing in protecting people and the environment from climate change is commendable and – speaking for wildlife already experiencing serious decline – greatly appreciated. There are hundreds of other less newsworthy but also important actions that local governments are taking across the country that help stabilize our climate, representing a broad swath of America. The combined effect is helping to fulfill roughly half of the greenhouse gas emissions reductions we agreed to in the Paris Climate Agreement in 2016 – a reduction of 26-28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.

Science dictates that we can and must do more, which is why the National Wildlife Federation’s family of affiliated organizations in 51 U.S. states and territories adopted a policy resolution this year calling for greater climate ambition by all non-federal governments.

Fortunately, there are at least two excellent opportunities at the ballot box this November 6 to take even bolder climate action:

Nevada:Question 6 – the Renewable Energy Promotion Initiative – will be on the November ballot to increase the amount of renewable energy that the state produces to 50 percent by 2030 (up from a current 25 percent requirement), taking advantage of ample solar and geothermal state resources.

Washington State:Ballot Initiative 1631 would require big polluters of climate-altering greenhouse gases to pay a $15 fee for each ton of pollution released, giving them a strong and clear reason to reduce how much they pollute and to switch over to clean energy alternatives. Money raised from the fees will be used to invest in even more climate solutions for the state, and to help local communities and low-income residents.

]]>137045EPA’s Latest Proposal: More Mercury In Fish and Peoplehttps://blog.nwf.org/2018/10/epas-latest-proposal-more-mercury-in-fish-and-people/
Tue, 09 Oct 2018 17:50:43 +0000http://blog.nwf.org/?p=137123This administration’s attempts to roll back clean air, clean water, climate, and other environmental safeguards are numerous and sometimes overwhelming. Yet, continued public watchfulness is necessary, as evidenced by the …

]]>This administration’s attempts to roll back clean air, clean water, climate, and other environmental safeguards are numerous and sometimes overwhelming. Yet, continued public watchfulness is necessary, as evidenced by the Environmental Protection Agency’s most recent proposal to weaken the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. This rule has been in place since 2011 to limit the release of toxic mercury and other hazardous air pollution from coal-fired power plants. Rolling back this safeguard would be disastrous for public health and wildlife.

Please join with us in saying NO to more toxic mercury pollution by retweeting the following:

The Toxic Danger of Mercury

Credit: Holger Link / Unsplash

Mercury is a naturally-occurring element, and is found in many sources, most notably coal. When coal is burned at a power plant, the mercury is released into the air. Some of the airborne mercury is then deposited by rain storms in local environments, or transported long distances and deposited in ecosystems far away from the source. This pollution makes its way into streams, rivers and lakes, and then travels up through organisms in the food chain to contaminate the food we eat and becoming a serious concern for all those who enjoy the outdoors.

In water, mercury converts quickly to methylmercury, its most toxic and easily consumed form. Mercury accumulates in the body tissue of fish and shellfish, and in greater concentrations in predatory fish. The mercury also collects in the bodies of wildlife like loons, ducks, eagles, and bears that rely on fish for their diet.

Young children are particularly at risk of the effects of mercury exposure. Credit: Julie Johnson / Unsplash

Mercury is a neurotoxin. When people eat fish or other food containing mercury, they are at risk for brain and neurological damage. For people of any age, mercury can cause loss of peripheral vision, coordination problems, muscle weakness, and impaired hearing, speaking, and walking. The developing brains of fetuses, infants, and children are at even greater risk. Early exposure – including in the womb – can lead to a lifetime of problems with cognitive thinking, memory, attention, language, fine motor skills, and visual spatial skills. For this reason, consumers – especially pregnant women and children – are advised by the federal government not to eat shark, swordfish, king mackerel, or tilefish, and to minimize their intake of other fish and shellfish. All 50 states have consumption advisories warning people about the mercury-related health risks from eating certain locally-caught fish.

When mercury enters the food chain, wildlife are unable to rid themselves of the neurotoxin. Because mercury is most toxic and most easily consumed after it enters water, scientists have focused on fish species and the predators that consume fish. However, scientists have also found dangerous levels of mercury in amphibians, reptiles, and song birds that are not closely linked with aquatic systems, which demonstrates how far mercury can travel across ecosystems.

Common loon. Credit: Wayne Wetherbee

Mercury can severely damage the neurological and hormonal systems of vertebrate species, and can impact their development. Even doses that are too low to kill an animal outright can have other impacts that reduce its ability to survive or produce viable offspring. One study found that very low levels of mercury in the Florida Everglades could reduce the number of ibis fledglings by half, which is enough to have population level impacts. Another study of ospreys in Montana found that only half the eggs laid by birds with high levels of mercury hatched.

We Can Protect People and Wildlife from Mercury and Air Toxics

Because of these serious human and wildlife health risks, the Obama Administration finalized a first-ever rule in 2011 to require coal plants to install technologies that make the pollution they release less dirty and toxic. The rule was estimated to quickly achieve 90 percent reductions in mercury pollution from coal-fired power plants. This pollution reduction was estimated by the Environmental Protection Agency to annually avoid:

up to 11,000 premature deaths;

nearly 5,000 heart attacks;

130,000 asthma attacks; and

5,700 hospital and emergency room visits.

Ibis. Credit: Vicki Sauer

The coal industry had challenged the rule, taking the case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, but the rule was ultimately left in place. Since then, the rule has been successfully implemented for a number of years, and the industry has invested significantly in new technologies. For this reason, prominent utility industry groups wrote to the Environmental Protection Agency this summer asking that the rule remain “in place and effective.” They titled their piece, “We already spent the money, keep [the] air toxics rule.”

The Trump Administration wants to reduce protections against mercury, claiming that the benefits of reducing mercury pollution are outweighed by the costs of complying with the regulation. However, environmental groups argue that the co-benefits – benefits to public health and the environment that come from reduced pollution overall, especially from cleaner air and water – far outweigh these costs. It is vital that we protect critical ecosystems from the harms of mercury pollution.

In sum, a rollback of the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards would pollute wildlife habitat to the detriment of vulnerable species and outdoor recreation, and harm public health, especially developing children. Plus, the regulated coal power industry wants to keep the rule in place. Clearly, there is no good reason – and a lot of bad reasons – to weaken or undo the mercury rule.

Please join us in calling on the Environmental Protection Agency to keep this common sense and important rule in place.

]]>137123Protecting Wildlife by Stopping a Lose-Lose-Lose Propositionhttps://blog.nwf.org/2018/04/protecting-wildlife-by-stopping-a-lose-lose-lose-proposition/
Fri, 13 Apr 2018 23:32:34 +0000http://blog.nwf.org/?p=134424On April 23, 2018, the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management will end the opportunity for public comment on its backward proposal to gut a common-sense Bureau of …

]]>On April 23, 2018, the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management will end the opportunity for public comment on its backward proposal to gut a common-sense Bureau of Land Management rule to limit methane emissions from oil and gas operations on tribal and federal public lands.

Why Limit Methane Emissions?

Methane is the primary component of natural gas. When natural gas is leaked or intentionally released into the air during oil and gas production and transport, methane and toxic air pollution (like benzene – a known carcinogen) are released along with it. Methane has more than 80 times the climate-disrupting power as carbon dioxide in the near-term, so every ton of methane gas emitted to the atmosphere has severe impact on our ability to stave off disaster for wildlife.

The Bureau of Land Management has a legal obligation to ensure oil and gas companies minimize the waste of energy resources during development on public lands, such as our treasured national parks and tribal lands.

In 2016, government watchdog analysis showed that the agency was not adequately tracking or limiting waste of natural gas resources. Another analysis from 2010 estimated that as much as 40 percent of natural gas currently vented or flared on federal lands could be captured economically with current technologies. Wasting this gas costs as much as $23 million in lost investment for states and local communities each year.

Benefits of the Methane Waste Rule

Recognizing this need to curb energy waste, and recognizing the overwhelming scientific agreement about the increasingly dangerous effects of climate change, the Bureau of Land Management finalized a rule in 2016 that charted a winning approach to reducing the amount of methane gas and other air pollution that is vented, flared, or leaked from oil and gas equipment.

After working diligently for more than two years with public and industry input, experts at the agency devised the rule to cut down on the venting and flaring of methane and to detect and stop leaks from equipment. In measuring the benefits of the new rule, the agency predicted the industry will be able to capture more product to sell, and taxpayers will get more royalties off the surplus methane sold by the companies.

Meanwhile, the rule will also cut intentional and unintentional releases of a very powerful greenhouse gas, lessening the effects of climate change on humans and wildlife. The rule is expected to cut methane emissions by 35 percent by 2025, as well as curb release of toxic air pollutants. Overall, the agency estimated that the rule’s benefits could be worth up to $204 million each year.

Yet Now Doing the Wrong Thing for Wildlife

By proposing to gut the methane waste rule, the Trump Administration’s Bureau of Land Management is backing out on years of science-driven work and millions of dollars in benefits for industry, the environment, wildlife, local communities, and public health. Of great concern to the National Wildlife Federation is how methane emissions fuel climatic changes that are threatening wildlife.

Climate change is already having profound impacts on vital wildlife habitat, causing ranges and food supplies to shift or be lost, increasing the incidence of pests and invasive species, and accelerating the rate of species extinction.

Scientists have concluded that climate change and other factors are causing an exceptionally rapid loss of biodiversity, and some say that a mass extinction event is underway. – National Wildlife Federation’s issue brief: Oil and Gas Methane Pollution: An Invisible Threat to Wildlife and Economic Opportunity for Communities

Given that methane gas accounts for approximately 11 percent of all U.S. climate-disrupting pollution, and that the oil and gas sector makes up about one-third of that methane pollution, the Bureau of Land Management was right when it devised a strategy to address this problem, and is now wrong to reverse course.

The U.S. Senate has already defended the 2016 methane rule, and public opinion supports methane standards for the oil and gas industry on a bipartisan basis. Gutting this rule would ignore this support and unnecessarily jeopardize wildlife.

]]>Species throughout our nation – including moose, sea turtles, and polar bears — are in serious jeopardy due to rising temperatures and sea levels, drought, pests, wildfires, and severe storms exacerbated by climate pollution. The Administration, and some in Congress, aim to roll back or cut programs that limit climate pollution from power plants, auto emissions, and oil and gas drilling. They also seek to slash funding for important research and clean technology.

Wildlife champions from across the country came together online and in force during the People’s Climate March to tell their stories and share pictures of the wildlife and wild places that matter most to them. We’ve compiled most of these stories to memorialize this passion for confronting climate change. See messages from hundreds of communities representing vastly different geographies and neighborhoods – from remote Lowell Point, Alaska, to sprawling Los Angeles, California, to suburban Naperville, Illinois, to vulnerable Cumberland Island, Georgia – and the calls for our leaders in Washington D.C. to take action:

Wildlife and wild lands can’t wait for a safer climate. Americans want to see concrete action to protect these national treasures.

Our National Advocacy Center staff and friends of wildlife are hand-delivering these messages in printed booklets to Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Interior. We will be bringing all march messages with us, including those not in the booklet.

Please help spread the Wildlife Climate March message by retweeting the following tweet.

]]>At the urging of fossil fuel interests, on June 12, 2017, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a two-year suspension or “stay” of core components of its 2016 final rule to curb methane pollution from new and modified oil and gas facilities. This is an unwise and harmful move by a federal agency charged with protecting our health, wildlife, and natural resources. The stay is also contrary to public support for new methane safeguards, and ignores the U.S. Senate’s recent bipartisan vote to uphold similar protections for oil and gas development on public lands.

Methane is a climate super-pollutant that has more than 80 times the planet-warming potential over carbon dioxide in the short-term, and is often emitted alongside other harmful air pollution by oil and gas producers, causing localized ozone and toxic pollution problems. The oil and gas industry is the single largest source of human caused methane pollution in the U.S. The EPA was right in 2016 to finalize a rule to require new oil and gas operations to incorporate plans to detect and repair leaks and install other pollution control devices to limit their methane and air pollution.

Oil and gas operations on public lands emit methane pollution that is harmful for pronghorn and their fawns. Photo by Mark Thornhoff, Bureau of Land Management.

As a powerful climate pollutant, methane hurts wildlife like the pronghorn and American pika and has the potential to impact the outdoor economy. Today, the outdoor recreation industry contributes $887 billion to our national economy annually, creates 7.6 million direct jobs, and generates $124.5 billion in federal, state, and local tax revenue. Hunters, anglers, birders, hikers, campers, and backyard wildlife watchers all depend on healthy wildlife populations and stable ecosystems. Methane pollution poses a direct threat to this growing industry.

More Oil and Gas Wells, More Methane Pollution

Natural Gas Flaring (photo: Flickr Creative Commons/Tim Evanson)

18,000 new oil and gas wells have come online since the rule was finalized. If it weren’t for the EPA’s rule suspension (including an earlier, 90-day stay), those producers would have had to comply with the rule’s requirements by June 3, 2017. The Trump Administration has already announced its intent to “review” the EPA rule and a parallel rule at the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), and canceled the Obama Administration’s Climate Action Plan and Strategy to Cut Methane Emissions, of which these rules were a central part.

These actions threaten to set back the progress we urgently need to keep carbon pollution below extremely dangerous levels.

This Administration is moving as aggressively as possible to dismantle climate policies that protect public health and wildlife, and there is no sign of a rollback slowdown. For this reason, we must be equally dogged and determined in speaking up on behalf of the special people, places, and wildlife we cherish.

]]>Each year the President sends Congress a proposed budget outlining his priorities for the country. President Trump’s proposed Fiscal Year 2018 budget request included unprecedented cuts to conservation funding. We oppose these proposed cuts and call on Congress to ensure funding for wildlife and conservation. This blog is part of a series outlining why such drastic federal budget cuts would intensify America’s wildlife crisis.

The President’s budget proposal urges a dramatic reduction in funding to combat the threats of climate change. Vital programs that protect air quality, advance clean energy, and prepare for climate threats would lose funding. Rather than adopting the proposed cuts, Congress should provide these initiatives with the funding needed to protect wildlife from increasingly volatile, costly, and damaging climate change.

Many wildlife species are already threatened by climate change. Greenhouse gas pollution from power plants, vehicles, and some types of land use are the biggest contributors to the problem. This pollution is not only warming the earth, but causing more extreme weather. Events like severe droughts, wildfires, sea-level rise, and greater pest and disease problems alter the food web, wildlife health, and migration patterns.

Fortunately, funding for climate solutions cuts this pollution and improves the resilience of wildlife habitat.

Sadly, the myth that cutting environmental laws and enforcement will protect the U.S. economy has been revived. The President’s budget proposal calls for cuts to climate pollution programs, scientific research, and grants.

“I think the president was pretty straightforward: We’re not spending money on that anymore. We consider that a waste of your money to go out and do that, so that is a specific tie to his campaign.”

The President has also stated that what the EPA does is a “disgrace” and that he only intends to leave “a little bit” of the environment for protection. The White House aims to cut hundreds of millions of dollars from climate change research, regulatory programs, advanced energy research and development, state assistance, and international aid and cooperation.

This view and these actions will hurt wildlife and the outdoor economy.

For example, these cuts will stall help for declining moose populations in the Northeast and threatened pika in the West. Plus, the budget ominously declares that EPA’s air pollution work should be “reoriented” to relieve burdens on the economy, cutting state grants for air monitoring and pollution control that protect wildlife and human health.

While the budget proposal is short on specifics, some programs are singled out for elimination:

All implementation related to the Clean Power Plan, including grants to states to help them comply

U.S. contributions to the Green Climate Fund and related programs, which limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions in developing countries and help adapt vulnerable societies to the unavoidable impacts of climate chang.

The pika may be one of the first mammals in California to become extinct due to global warming.

The budget would also eliminate a flood hazard mapping program and other disaster mitigation programs. These programs protect wildlife like the loggerhead sea turtle from sea-level rise and increasingly severe flooding events.

These cuts, if enacted, would hurt efforts to reduce climate pollution by:

canceling carbon standards that reduce pollution and spur innovation

impairing states’ ability to implement clean energy goals and protect people and wildlife from climate impacts and air pollution

burying scientific research and stalling innovation in climate solutions that create jobs and cut pollution

]]>https://blog.nwf.org/2017/03/what-budget-means-for-wildlife-climate-change/feed/0126843Stalled Tailpipe Standards Send both Innovation and Climate Protection to the Junkyardhttps://blog.nwf.org/2017/03/stalled-tailpipe-standards-send-both-innovation-and-climate-protection-to-the-junkyard/
https://blog.nwf.org/2017/03/stalled-tailpipe-standards-send-both-innovation-and-climate-protection-to-the-junkyard/#respondWed, 15 Mar 2017 20:42:35 +0000http://blog.nwf.org/?p=126521On Wednesday, March 15, 2017, the Trump Administration announced that it would cancel the next round of fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas pollution improvements for cars and light trucks, stalling …

]]>On Wednesday, March 15, 2017, the Trump Administration announced that it would cancel the next round of fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas pollution improvements for cars and light trucks, stalling much-needed climate progress that would benefit wildlife and public health.

Moose are already suffering significant declines likely due to climate change in several northern states. Photo by Daniel Mitchell Rothman.

TRANSPORTATION, POLLUTION, AND WILDLIFE

The transportation sector now emits more climate pollution than any other sector in the U.S., at about 1/3 of the nation’s total per year. The carbon pollution coming from tailpipes fuels an array of damaging impacts that wildlife are already seeing, and which are predicted to get worse in the coming decades if more is not done.

Cutthroat Trout. Image: Flickr(CircumerroStock)

Moose populations in the Northeast are declining rapidly, largely due to tick infestations that cannot be curtailed during increasingly mild winters. Loggerhead sea turtles are having increasing difficulty finding nesting beaches as sea-level rise eats away at shorelines. Pika can climb no higher to find cooler elevations in the Rocky Mountains. And, freshwater streams in the West are running too warm and dry to support a healthy number of trout.

These are just a few examples of the negative impacts wildlife are already facing due to increasing climate pollution, of which transportation is a major contributor.

NATIONAL CLEAN CAR STANDARDS

The auto pollution requirements were first established in 2012 and affirmed in 2016 at the end of the EPA and Department of Transportation’s obligatory “midterm review” of what automakers would reasonably be able to accomplish with advancing technology in model years 2022-2025. The agencies determined that, based on all available data, automakers could create cars and light trucks that, when averaged across the entire fleet, would achieve about a 1 mile-per-gallon improvement in fuel economy per year over 10 years, reaching a fleet average of 54.5 MPG in 2025.

These requirements may sound modest, but they were expected to reduce carbon pollution by 540 million metric tons over the lifetime of vehicles produced between 2022-2025. This would result in a total reduction of 6 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide since 2011, cutting the sector’s greenhouse pollution in half.

This dramatic reduction in pollution would improve our air quality, health, and outdoor recreational experience, while making significant strides in lessening future climate change. The 2022-2025 standards would also cut oil consumption by 1.2 billion barrels and save each car owner an average of $1,650, lessening the need to drill for oil in public lands and waters, improving national security, and saving consumers money. When added on top of earlier standards, the benefits are even more significant.

STATES’ RIGHTS TO EVEN CLEANER CLEAN CAR MEASURES

Compounding trouble for wildlife, reports indicate the Trump Administration is still considering a future action to rescind a unique and vital regulatory approval granted to the state of California. This approval – which another 15 states rely on – allows those states to implement more protective air quality (including climate) standards because of their substantial pollution problems. This approval has been granted 45 times since the Clean Air Act was written, and has never been rescinded.

A WORD ABOUT SCIENCE AND PUBLIC INPUT

The 2022-2025 fuel economy standards were based on leading, peer-reviewed scientific evidence of climate change and years of transparent and thorough technical review, extensive vehicle testing, consultation with industry, varied stakeholders, and other experts, plus significant input from the public. Withdrawing the standards now unnecessarily reopens the review process and adds potentially years of delay. Wildlife cannot afford more delay in reducing pollution, especially those species losing habitat to increasingly extreme weather, wildfires, or sea-level rise. And, reversing course would leave science-based decision-making on climate change in the dust.

It is time to park this and other climate policy rollbacks by the road-side in favor of pollution solutions that benefit wildlife, consumers, and national security, and fuel the next generation of cleaner cars.